Ⅰ. Introduction

This study examines the structure, characteristics, and educational significance of the Jeongsa Hwigam (正史彙鑑, An Anthology of Lessons from the Official Histories), which was compiled during the late Joseon period for the Ye-hak (睿學, education of crown prince) of the Grand Heir (世孫).

Jeongsa Hwigam was compiled by Joseon high official and courtier Hong Bong-han (洪鳳漢, 1713-1778) with the aim of educating his maternal grandson, the Grand Heir Yi Seong (who would later become King Jeongjo 正祖, 1752–1800), in wisdom and virtue to prepare him for assuming his future responsibilities as Joseon king. Historical texts are often extensive in length and scope, making it challenging to read them comprehensively or extract their essential points. Hong Bong-han sought to ensure that the Grand Heir would gain a deep understanding of pivotal historical facts and foster the virtues essential for a ruler. Thus, Hong Bong-han collected historiographical accounts of the deeds of Chinese rulers spanning from the reigns of Tang and Yu (唐虞) to the Ming Dynasty, drawing from five classic Sinographic texts: Fengzhou gang jian hui zuan (鳳洲綱鑑會纂), Chun qiu Zuo shi zhuan (春秋左氏傳), Zizhi tongjian (資治通鑑), Xu zizhi tongjian (續資治通鑑), and Myeongsa gangmok (明史綱目). From these sources, he identified 869 historical anecdotes, categorizing them into 34 thematic sections and further dividing them into 557 anecdotes as ‘matters to emulate’ (法條) and 312 as ‘matters to avoid’ (戒條). He appended his own commentary to each theme, beginning with an overarching summary. He then briefly described the historical precedents of past kings and notable figures from Joseon, emphasizing the importance of each theme and imparting repeated counsel to the Grand Heir.

Even prior to the compilation of the Jeongsa Hwigam, the Joseon dynasty already had a tradition of placing great emphasis on royal education. For this purpose, Joseon scholars had compiled various instructional texts starting from the earliest years of the dynasty. During the reign of King Taejong (太宗, r. 1400-1418), a concise version of Daehak yeoneui (大學衍義) was compiled. Under King Sejong (世宗, r. 1418-1450), significant texts such as Chipyung yoram (治平 要覽), Sayunyojib (絲綸要集) and Jachi tonggam gangmok huneui (資治通鑑綱目訓義) were compiled. Prominent scholars also contributed by compiling educational texts aimed at training future kings. Notable examples include Seonghak sipdo (聖學十圖) by Yi Hwang (李滉, 1501– 1570) and Seonghak jibyo (聖學輯要) by Yi I (李珥, 1536–1584). Jeongsa Hwigam represents a continuation of this tradition of compiling texts for the purpose of royal education. Accordingly, this paper examines its significance as an instructional text for kingship by analyzing the relationship between Hong Bong-han and King Jeongjo, the five extant versions of Jeongsa Hwigam, its compilation background, and its organizational methodology. This study seeks to illuminate an instructional aspect of the educational ethos during the Yeongjo (英祖, r. 1724-1776) and Jeongjo (r. 1776-1800) period, an era that revitalized Joseon’s cultural heritage in the late Joseon Dynasty.

This paper has been revised and supplemented based on the following academic articles: “Compilation and Characteristic of Formation in Jeongsa Hwigam as the Learning for the Ruler”; “Annotated Jeongsa Hwigam by Hong Bong-han: Focusing on Volumes 1 and 2”; and “A Study of Jeongjo’s letters sent to his grandfather Hong bonghan.” The stand-alone book The Annotated Jeongsa Hwigam (Volumes 1 and 2) has also been used. The latter was published in 2022 by the Dankook University Institute for Research in Hanmun Education. The Dankook University edition presents a full modern Korean translation of the entire original version, which consisted of eight volumes compiled into four books (8卷4冊). This work was part of the Suwon Studies Academic Research Support Project in 2020 and 2021.

Ⅱ. The Relationship Between Hong bonh-han and King Jeongjo

Hong Bong-han was a prominent civil official (文臣) of the late Joseon Dynasty, serving in prominent roles such as Second State Councillor (右議政), First State Councillor (左議政), and Chief State Councillor (領議政). His courtesy name was Ik-yeo (翼汝), his pen name was Ik-ik-jae (翼翼齋), and he was posthumously honored with the title Ik-jeong (翼靖). His family origin traces back to Pungsan (豊山). As the father of Lady Hyegyeong (惠慶宮 洪氏), the father-in-law of Crown Prince Sado (莊獻世子), and the maternal grandfather of King Jeongjo, he played a central role in state affairs during the reign of King Yeongjo. His relationships with Crown Prince Sado and the Gyeongju Kim clan, and the political dynamics of late King Yeongjo’s reign have been subjects of considerable controversy, making a definitive evaluation of his historical role challenging. Nevertheless, his contributions as an accomplished administrator deserve recognition, particularly for his involvement in key reforms and initiatives under King Yeongjo, including the Tangpyeong (蕩平) policy of political balance, the military tax reform (均役), and river dredging projects (濬川), which the king himself regarded as his three major achievements.

Hong Bong-han compiled Jeongsa Hwigam for King Jeongjo. Accordingly, this paper seeks to briefly introduce materials that shed light on their close relationship. One such material is the following excerpt from the Yikjeonggongjugo (翼靖公奏藁總敍), a text written by King Jeongjo about Hong Bong-han.1) King Jeongjo’s comments reflect his deep admiration for his maternal grandfather.

Hong Bong-han was highly regarded as a promising talent from a young age. Rising to esteemed positions, likened to a dragon stirring clouds and a tiger summoning winds, he carried out his duties with exceptional brilliance. Representing the six ministries (六官) and overseeing the five military commands (五營), he managed state affairs comprehensively and worked to correct the conduct of officials. His unparalleled dedication to governance and loyal service made him stand out among his contemporaries. Deeply moved by the king’s exceptional regard for him, Hong committed himself wholeheartedly to his responsibilities, regardless of whether the tasks were straightforward or fraught with difficulties. Engaging in dialogues with the king on issues ranging from rites and music (禮樂) to military and agricultural policies (兵農), as well as laws and regulations, he approached his role with unwavering determination. In his spare moments, he sought advice from retired generals and experienced officials to address the benefits and shortcomings of national policies. Through his diligent efforts, he corrected inefficiencies, ensured the success in reforms, and earned respect from both the court and the public for over 40 years—an achievement truly worthy of admiration. Hong Bong-han was known for his dignified demeanor, extraordinary ambition, and wisdom that embraced the principles of all things. His capacity for governance was sufficient to stabilize societal trends. In the court, his upright posture inspired respect among officials. His words and writings were always clear and sincere, leaving a legacy in historical records that benefited future generations. Such accomplishments could not have been achieved without a solid foundation of character and intellect.2)

The excerpt reflects King Jeongjo’s high regard for his grandfather’s character, scholarship, capabilities, and contributions. King Jeongjo himself compiled Hong Bong-han’s writings on state governance into a work titled Hongikjeonggong jugo (洪翼靖公奏藁) and wrote the preface for it. This collection was significant enough to occupy three full volumes in Hongjae jeonseo (弘齋全 書). Furthermore, King Jeongjo gathered and published Hong Bong-han’s writings into a posthumous collection (遺集), further underscoring the king’s deep appreciation for his grandfather’s literary achievements. This serves as clear evidence of King Jeongjo’s high regard for Hong Bong-han’s writings.

In February 1759 (the 35th year of King Yeongjo’s reign), the 8-year-old Jeongjo was formally designated as the Goyal Heir (世孫), and Hong Bong-han was appointed as his tutor (世孫師). As Jeongjo’s maternal grandfather and teacher, Hong Bong-han provided significant guidance, which is clearly reflected in the letters Jeongjo wrote to him. A collection of 2,094 handwritten letters and notes exchanged among King Yeongjo, Crown Prince Sado, King Jeongjo, and the Pungsan Hong family was organized into 58 fascicles (帖) in August 1806. Among these, ten fascicles comprise letters written by Jeongjo to Hong Bong-han, including 311 Yechal (睿札, letters written by the Grand Heir), 2 Yesi (睿詩, poems written by the Grand Heir), and 15 Eochal (御札, letters written by the King), totaling 328 pieces. Of these ten fascicles, six have been confirmed to exist to date.

Here are a few examples of the letters that Jeongjo sent to his grandfather:

The weather has been unstable lately; how is your health? Confronted with today’s unexpected events —somethings I could not have imagined even in my dreams—my heart is shattered and torn. How can I possibly express this pain? Today is my maternal grandfather’s birthday, which brings joy and comfort, yet I am deeply saddened that I cannot personally inquire after your well-being. The rest of my words fail to take proper form.3)

The spring weather has been unsettled; how is your health? It has been far too long since I last received your guidance, leaving my heart deeply uneasy. Today is my maternal grandfather’s birthday, yet I am unable to offer my congratulations in person due to present circumstances, and I cannot help but feel a profound sense of regret. I will leave the rest unsaid for now. Please forgive the lack of proper formality in this letter.4)

Though the weather is unfavorable, I trust you are well, and the thought brings me indescribable joy. Today is not an ordinary day; it is my maternal grandfather’s birthday. Yet, due to unavoidable circumstances, I am unable to meet with you and exchange words, leaving me at a loss for how to fully express my sorrow. I will leave the rest of my thoughts unsaid for now. This letter may lack proper formality; I ask for your kind understanding.5)

The spring weather has been unkind, and I deeply regret that I have been unable to inquire after your health. My longing for you grows ever stronger. Today is no ordinary day—it is my maternal grandfather’s birthday. Yet, I cannot visit you, and my feelings of yearning and regret have intensified to an unbearable degree. With spring has already passed its midpoint, and today marking this special occasion, I imagine the heartache you feel must be as piercingly fresh as ever. I cannot suppress my earnest desire to offer you some form of comfort. As for myself, I have been carrying on much the same as before. I will leave the rest for another time. Please forgive the lack of proper formality in this letter.6)

King Jeongjo sent letters annually on February 23, his maternal grandfather’s birthday, to inquire after his well-being. The letters above are from 1764, 1765, 1766, and 1767. The first letter, sent on February 23, 1764, coincided with the decision to transfer the royal lineage to Crown Prince Hyojang (孝章世子, 1719-1728).7) In this letter, Jeongjo expressed his profound grief to his maternal grandfather.

From a young age, Jeongjo received guidance from Hong Bong-han, as reflected in his letters. A recurring phrase in these letters includes: “How could I not engrave in my heart the eight characters you have taught me: ‘Strengthen your resolve and dedicate yourself to learning’ [立志益 固, 典學益勤]?”8) Jeongjo often sought literary advice from his grandfather, asking for suggestions on topics for poems and essays.9) He also requested Hong Bong-han to revise and refine prefaces he had written.10) Additionally, Jeongjo sought assistance in drafting memorials (疏章) to be submitted to King Yeongjo.11) He also asked Hong Bong-han to compose and edit the preface to Myeongsa gangmok (明史綱目).12) Jeongjo requested advice on creating a heonho (軒號)13), demonstrating his reliance on Hong Bong-han’s wisdom in various literary and scholarly matters.

In September 1766, Hong Bong-han’s stepmother, Lady Yi (李氏), passed away. Upon hearing the news of Lady Yi’s declining health, King Jeongjo began sending letters inquiring about her well-being starting on August 1. In September, he sent a series of letters expressing his concern over her illness while also worrying about his maternal grandfather’s health as he cared for her. After Lady Yi’s passing, Jeongjo sent multiple letters to the mourning hut (廬幕), offering words of comfort to his grandfather. In these letters, he urged his grandfather to take care of himself, writing, “Considering your age, you must eat something, even if only out of necessity,” and emphasized the importance of preserving his health. Jeongjo also expressed his longing to see his grandfather during the mourning period (喪期), when visits were not possible.

Though I have been unable to see you due to the distance between us, three years have swiftly passed. Morning and evening, I long for you deeply, but I can only keep my feelings in my heart. Recently, as the season grows colder, I wonder if your health remains stable with the blessings of the divine. My longing for you is beyond what words can express. Here, fortunately, life continues much as it did before. You have endured with your frail body and have smoothly completed the three-year mourning period. How boundless is the joy and relief this brings! Moreover, as your grandson, I have received an immeasurable amount of kindness and love from you—an affection so extraordinary that it is seldom heard of even in ancient times. Truly, the happiness within our family is beyond compare. However, I have done little to express even a fraction of my gratitude. Recently, I heard that your main residence lacks a proper hanging plaque (扁額). Although my calligraphy is unrefined, I considered it a small blessing to express my sincerity through this effort. Thus, I have inscribed a plaque with the phrase Jeonghyu (貞休). The term Jeonghyu is derived from the Shujing (書經), specifically the Luogao (洛誥), which states: “Let the two of us together be upright and resolute. May you, with me, revere Heaven’s blessings for ten thousand million years [我二人共貞, 公其以予萬億 年敬天之休].”14) I have taken inspiration from this passage, carefully inscribed the plaque, and humbly present it to you. I am uncertain whether the intended meaning of the phrase is suitable, but I sincerely hope you will find it suitable and display it.15)

The passage above is a yechal (睿札) sent on October 16, 1768, which reveals King Jeongjo’s deep affection for his maternal grandfather. To honor his grandfather, who had successfully completed the three-year mourning period, Jeongjo chose Jeonghyu (貞休) as the appellation of the main residence (堂號) and inscribed the name onto a plaque. The term Jeonghyu is derived from the Luogao (洛誥) chapter of the Shujing (書經). In this text, during the reign of King Cheng of Zhou (周成王), after Zhou Gong (周公) established the capital at Luoyang (洛邑) and sent an envoy to report to the king, the king declared: “You have already chosen the site for the residence and sent someone to inform me, showing that the divinations are beautiful and always auspicious. Let the two of us together be upright and resolute. May you, with me, revere Heaven’s blessings for ten thousand million years. I bow and express my deepest respect for the teachings you have imparted.”16) From this context, it is evident that Jeongjo viewed his relationship with his grandfather as akin to that of King Cheng and Zhou Gong.

Ⅲ. The Purpose and Compilation Period of Jeongsa Hwigam

Hong Bong-han explains his purpose in compiling Jeongsa Hwigam in its preface:

The Confucian classics (經書) expound dao (道), while historical texts (史書) record events. Although dao and historical events differ, their ultimate purposes converge. Therefore, a thorough understanding of historical texts can supplement the study of the Confucian classics. However, while the Confucian classics are inherently concise and leave little room for debate, historical texts are extensive in volume. This presents potential challenges that readers may fail to grasp their essential points. Without understanding these key aspects, the utilization of knowledge becomes difficult. Moreover, in the royal family (帝王家), where countless tasks converge, rulers face numerous responsibilities but have limited time for reading. How, then, could they possibly read widely, reflect deeply, and distill the essence of these texts? For this reason, I carefully examined historical texts from successive dynasties and selected key points for principles and warnings. I then classified and summarized into a concise format, titled Jeongsa Hwigam (正史彙鑑), to provide a convenient reference for study during moments of leisure.17)

In the preface, Hong Bong-han quote Cheng Hao (程顥, 1032–1082), who remarked, “The greatest duty of a ruler lies in examining the past,” emphasizing the importance of reflecting on historical events to use them as a reflection.18)

A notable characteristic of Jeongsa Hwigam is its nature as an instructional text for statecraft (經世) specifically compiled for a single individual, the Grand Heir, similar to the way that Yi I (李珥) authored Seonghakjipyo (聖學輯要) for King Seonjo (宣祖, r. 1567-1608). Hong Bong-han wrote the following in the Geun-an (謹按) of the final section, Yu-Hu-Gon (裕後昆): “Ah! About thirty thematic sections presented above are all deeply connected to the principles of rulership. That worthy of emulation should be emulated, and those warranting caution should be avoided. If each is earnestly practiced and does not remain as mere empty words on paper, then everything discussed in these sections will serve as a basis for leaving exemplary virtue to future generations. Furthermore, it will solidify the enduring legacy of the state for countless generations to come.”19) Through this statement, Hong urged the Grand Heir to thoroughly examine all the sections, internalize the principles of governance, and become a sage king; he also proposed that the anthology would constitute a standard of righteous rule for future heirs to follow.

Examining records related to Jeongsa Hwigam reveals that memorial submitted by Hong Bong-han’s fourth son, Hong Nak-yun (洪樂倫, 1750–1813), petitioning for his father’s exoneration (伸寃). In this memorial, he stated: “When my father was in mourning for his mother in the byeongsul year (1766), he had compiled one volume of Jeongsa Hwigam, carried it in his sleeve, and presented it to the Grand Heir in the first month of the gichuk year (1769).”20) This statement is consistent with the contents of the preface to Jeongsa Hwigam.21) Further details were provided in the Hongikjeong yusa (洪翼靖遺事)22), written by Hong Bong-han’s second son, Hong Nak-sin (洪樂信, 1739–1796), which describes the work as follows: “From the official histories (正史), he selected examples of actions by ancient rulers worthy of emulation and caution, compiling them into a number of sections. To each section, he appended his own commentary and organized the material into eight volume (8卷) bound in four books（4冊), titled Jeongsa Hwigam. He then presented it to the Grand Heir, following the precedent of ancient scholars23) who offered the Qianqiu jinjian lu (千秋金鑑錄).”24) At the time, Hong Bong-han had resigned from his position as Chief State Councillor (領議政) in July 1766 (the 42nd year of King Yeongjo’s reign) due to the illness of his stepmother, Lady Yi (李氏). He returned to office in November 1768, after completing the mourning period (喪期). During this interim, he organized the eight volumes （compiled into four books）of Jeongsa Hwigam, which were subsequently presented to the Grand Heir in January 1769.

There are few records regarding Jeongsa Hwigam, which makes it difficult to determine details about its editorial process, publication, or practical use. In 1771, a year after Hong Bong-han completed and presented Jeongsa Hwigam to the Royal Grandson, Hong fell from political favor due to a memorial submitted by a Confucian scholar, Han Yu (韓鍮). In 1771, Qing scholar Zhu Lin’s (朱璘) Mingji jilue (明紀輯略) and Gangjian huizuan (綱鑑會纂) were designated as prohibited books. Consequently, Fengzhou gangjian huizuan (鳳洲綱鑑會纂) by Wang Shizhen (王 世貞, 1526–1590) and Myeongsa gangmok (明史綱目) by Yi Hyeon-seok (李玄錫, 1647-1703) were either burned or erased (洗草). This event occurred two years after Hong Bong-han had presented Jeongsa Hwigam. Given that Jeongsa Hwigam cited passages from Fengzhou gangjian huizuan and Myeongsa gangmok, it is presumed that the prohibition on the latter two texts influenced views on Hong Bong-han’s work. At the time, King Jeongjo sent a letter to Hong Bong-han informing him of the situation surrounding Fengzhou gangjian huizuan.25) It is evident that Jeongsa Hwigam was compiled specifically for the Royal Grandson and was thus unlikely to have been widely disseminated among the public. However, it is presumed that the aforementioned historical circumstances further limited its dissemination.

Subsequently, King Yeongjo ordered the re-publication and distribution of Myeongsa gangmok (明史綱目), removing Zhu Lin’s commentaries while preserving the original text (舊本). He also rescinded his order that posthumously stripped Yi Hyeon-seok of his official titles. Around this time, King Jeongjo composed a preface for Myeongsa gangmok.26) A few days later, Jeongjo sent Jeongsa Hwigam to Hong Bong-han.27) An examination of the five extant editions of Jeongsa Hwigam reveals that at least two rounds of revisions were carried out after January 1769. Based on this evidence, it can be inferred that editorial revisions continued during this period.

Ⅳ. Bibliographic Information and Comparison of the Five Version of Jeongsa Hwigam to Determine Its Reliable Edition (善本)

1. Bibliographic Information of the Five Versions of Jeongsa Hwigam

The currently identified copies of Jeongsa Hwigam consist of five versions: two held by the Seoul National University Kyujanggak Institute of Korean Studies (SNU Kyujanggak), one held by the Academy of Korean Studies Jangseogak Archives (Jangseogak), one in the Agawa Collection (阿川文庫) of the University of Tokyo (Agawa Collection), and one in the Waseda University Library. For reference, the version held by the National Library of Korea (NLK) was published in 1990 as a facsimile reproduction of the Agawa Collection version. Additionally, the Jangseogak copy is included as a facsimile in Yuwai suojian zhongguo gushi yanjiu ziliao huibian (域外所見中 國古史研究資料彙編), published in China in 2013.28) The bibliographic information for all five extant manuscript versions, is summarized in the table below.

2. Reliable Editions (善本) of Jeongsa Hwigam

All five extant versions of Jeongsa Hwigam are manuscript copies, and none of them provides information about the scribes or the dates of transcription, which makes it impossible to determine their chronological order. Consequently, this paper analyzes the bibliographic details, structural differences, and textual variations among the versions to hypothesize which version(s) can be considered as the reliable edition (善本) and to explore its compilation characteristics through a translation.

The Kyujanggak 奎4860 version comprises only the third book. When compared to the third books of the other four versions, several notable differences become apparent: its overall format differs from the others; it contains a larger number of selected historical examples (典故), it leaves blank spaces under each theme, and it exhibits textual variations. Based on these characteristics, it is inferred to be the initial draft (初稿本).

By contrast, the Kyujanggak 奎1140 version is similar in format to the other three versions. It contains fewer selected examples than Kyujanggak 奎4860 but more than the other three versions, leaves blank spaces under each theme as well, and shows textual differences. These characteristics indicate that it may be a revised version (改編本).

The version held by the University of Tokyo can be presumed to be reliable edition(善本) or a definitive edition (定本), based on several factors. These include the smaller number of compiled historical examples (典故) compared to Kyujanggak 奎4860 and 奎1140, alterations in phrasing, and the practice of leaving blank pages only at the end of volumes (卷), and its overall similarity to the versions held by Waseda University Library and the Jangseogak, aside from minor variations in characters. Here, the term definitive edition (定本) extends beyond the concept of a draft version (稿本) to signify a text that can serve as a standard among transmitted version (傳來本).30) Although eight errors have been identified in this copy, these are nearly identical to those found in the versions held by Waseda University Library and the Jangseogak.

The versions held by Waseda University Library and the Jangseogak share nearly identical content with the version held by the University of Tokyo. The Waseda University Library version contains seven identical errors, while the Jangseogak version contains eight identical errors. Moreover, both versions exhibit additional issues, such as omissions of certain historical examples, suggesting that these are likely transcription copies (傳寫本). One key clue supporting this assumption is the presence of identical typographical errors (誤字). For instance, in the Dokseonghyo (篤聖孝) section, the versions held by the University of Tokyo, Waseda University Library, and Jangseogak all record “魯哀公薨,” whereas the Kyujanggak version reads “襄公.“ Since this reference pertains to the death of Xiang Gong (襄公), the character “哀” is evidently a typographical error. Similarly, in the Geunsajeon (謹祀典) section, the University of Tokyo, Waseda University Library, and Jangseogak versions all record “朕之于神, 惟恐誠敬未盡, 何敢彈 勞,” while the Kyujanggak version substitutes “彈” with “憚.” The original source, Myeongsa gangmok (明史綱目), also uses “憚.” Similar instances of such discrepancies are found in several other sections.

Through bibliographic analysis and textual comparisons, the version held by the Agawa Collection of the University of Tokyo has been identified as a presumed reliable version (善本) of Jeongsa Hwigam. Accordingly, this paper examines its structure using the University of Tokyo version as the primary reference.

Ⅴ. The Structure and Content of Jeongsa Hwigam

Hong Bong-han describes the organizational method of Jeongsa Hwigam in the Preface to Jeongsa Hwigam as follows:

By carefully examining the historical records from prior dynasties, I gathered and classified examples of ‘matters to emulate’ (法條) and ‘matters to avoid’ (戒條), extracting their key points. I titled the work Jeongsa Hwigam to make it convenient for reference during moments of leisure amidst official duties. The work consists of eight sections divided into 34 thematic sections; the remaining minor entries have been arranged according to the category in which they belong and are thus appended. The material begins with the Tang and Yu (唐虞) and goes all the way to the Ming dynasty, and includes items selected from historical accounts of other states such as Wei (魏), Liao (遼), Jin (金), Yuan (元), Northern Qi (北齊), and Southern Tang (南唐), so as to show a continuous succession of historical achievements and provide sufficient evidence of past deeds. Redundant passages were trimmed, and excessively verbose sections were simplified. In cases where a single passage contained distinct meanings, I divided and reorganized them accordingly. Following the precedent of the ancients who annotated and critiqued texts during their compilation, I appended ‘Geun-an’ (謹按) beneath each section to add my humble thoughts. The excellent strategies and noble principles of our illustrious ancestors were examined not only through official records but also by gathering reliable writings from the private sector, integrating them into the work to uphold the principle of continuing the intentions of our forebears.31)

Hong Bong-han cited the sources of his selected historical anecdotes (典故) from five texts: Fengzhou gang jian hui zuan (鳳洲綱鑑會纂), Chun qiu Zuo shi zhuan (春秋左氏傳), Zizhi tongjian (資治通鑑), Xu zizhi tongjian (續資治通鑑), and Myeongsa gangmok (明史綱目).32) He examined the historical anecdotes of rulers from the Tang and Yu periods (唐虞) to the Ming dynasty (明) and categorized them into 34 thematic sections Under each theme, he further classified 557 entries as ‘matters to emulate’ (法條) and 312 entries as ‘matters to avoid’ (戒條). To conclude each section, he added his own reflections, beginning with Geun-an (謹按) and concluding with Yeomjae, yeomjae (念哉念哉). In these reflections, he provided an overarching summary of the selected anecdotes, briefly outlined similar examples from the precedents of past Joseon kings and notable figures, and reiterated the significance of the theme. This structure served as a means of repeatedly emphasizing his advice to the Royal Grandson.

The themes of each volume of Jeongsa Hwigam can be broadly summarized as follows:

Volume 1 outlines the guiding principles of Jeongsa Hwigam. It emphasizes performing filial duties with sincerity, adhering to ancestral laws, reverently following the will of Heaven, conducting rituals in accordance with proper etiquette while remaining considerate of the people, and committing oneself to scholarship consistently. These principles form the moral foundation for both governance and personal conduct.

Volume 2 discusses the virtues essential for gaining the trust of officials and the people in the administration state affairs. It emphasizes venerating Confucian learning while rejecting heretical ideas, promoting frugality, avoiding extravagant or rare items, and refusing tributes offered by officials or the people. Additionally, it also advises eliminating biases and personal desires, refraining over-reliance on one’s own cleverness to prioritize personal will, and ensuring that commands and policies are carried out effectively to gain the trust of the people.

Volume 3 focuses on regulating the royal household and maintaining proper decorum within the royal court. It highlights the importance of upholding discipline among palace women, ensuring that princesses fulfill their roles as women of virtue, and preventing favoritism toward close courtiers or relatives from influencing state affairs. It also emphasizes fostering harmony among royal relatives, and treating both maternal and paternal relatives with careful propriety. This volume underscores the critical need to prevent royal relatives or favored individuals from interfering in governance to the detriment of the state. In essence, it discusses the ruler’s responsibility in maintaining order within the royal household (齊家).

Volume 4 discusses the appointment of talented individuals. It emphasizes the importance of entrusting tasks with confidence once they are delegated. Additionally, it highlights the importance of discerning deceitful behavior among officials, exercising caution to avoid errors in the selection and appointment of officials, and administering examinations with strict standards. This volume underscores the importance of maintaining integrity and rigor in the recruitment and employment of officials.

Volume 5 focuses on opening channels of communication to allow officials and scholars to freely present their opinions, establishing schools to teach filial piety (孝悌) and righteousness (仁 義), fostering the scholarly spirit, and honoring individuals of exemplary conduct and virtue to encourage the populace toward honor and integrity. It underscores the necessity of cultivating moral and ethical values within society.

Volume 6 discusses economic policies aimed at stabilizing the livelihoods of the people and ensuring the state’s financial stability. It emphasizes genuine compassion for the people, akin to caring for an infant, by reducing corvée labor and taxes, providing relief for impoverished people, and implementing policies that consider the hardships of the populace. Additionally, it emphasizes saving resources during times of peace to prepare for emergencies, simplifying royal processions and ceremonies to reduce costs, and alleviating the burdens on the people. The volume highlights the importance of prudent management of labor and taxes, relief measures for the poor, and frugality in royal and governmental expenditures to sustain the prosperity of the state’s finances.

Volume 7 discusses the necessity of consistent and impartial enforcement of laws. It emphasizes that once laws are established, they should not be frequently altered or inconsistently applied, ensuring that the people can understand and follow them. It calls for distinguishing between virtuous individuals and petty opportunists, appointing or dismissing them fairly to uphold order and discipline. Rewards and punishments should be administered justly, ensuring that the system of rewards and penalties remains firmly established. Furthermore, even after teaching the virtues of filial piety, loyalty, propriety, and integrity, if individuals still fail to comply, punishments must be applied judiciously. However, compassion for the people should always guide the enforcement of laws, avoiding excessive harshness. When granting pardons, careful consideration must be exercised to maintain justice and fairness.

Volume 8 emphasizes the importance of respecting officials and ensuring their dignity is not undermined by arbitrary punishments. It advocates for impartiality in distinguishing between the virtuous and the corrupt, regardless of factional affiliations. Competent individuals should be appointed, while ensuring that malicious individuals do not harm righteous ones. The volume also emphasizes the need to prepare for potential crises by maintaining military facilities and equipment during times of peace. In the final thematic sections, in the geun-an (謹按), it highlights the importance of reflecting on and implementing the principles discussed in each section to leave behind a legacy of exemplary governance for future generations.

Ⅵ. Significance as an Educational Text

The Joseon dynasty placed great importance on the education of kings and royal heirs. With the adoption of Confucianism as the governing ideology, Kyung-yeon (經筵, Royal Lectures) became increasingly institutionalized. After the ascension of King Taejo (太祖, r. 1392-1398), kyung-yeon sessions were held to discuss texts such as the Sishu (四書), Daxue yanyi (大學衍義), and Zhenguan zhengyao (貞觀政要). During the reign of King Sejong (r. 1418-1450), kyung-yeon became nearly a daily occurrence, and King Sejong established the Jiphyeonjeon (集賢殿) to oversee these royal lectures exclusively. From the early years of its founding, Joseon also compiled various texts for the education of kings and crown princes. During King Taejong’s reign, the textual content of Daxue yanyi was condensed and simplified for practical use. Under King Sejong, instructional texts such as Chipyungyoram (治平要覽) and Jachi tonggam gangmok hunui (資治通 鑑綱目訓義) were compiled, often in relation to Daxue yanyi. Additionally, Saryunyojip (絲綸要 集) was compiled and used as an educational text for the grand heirs. Individually authored works also contributed to royal education, such as Yi Seok-hyeong’s (李石亨, 1415–1477) Dae hak yeonui jipryak (大學衍義輯略). This text abridged Daxue yanyi while incorporating admonitory content (鑑戒) from Goryeosa (高麗史), providing moral and practical lessons.

By the mid-Joseon period, the dynasty began compiling books that articulated its own governing ideologies, moving beyond its dependence on imported texts from China. Notable examples of such works, inspired by the compilation system of Daxue yanyi (大學衍義), include Yi Eon-jeok’s (李彦 迪, 1491–1553) Jungyong gugyeong yeonui (中庸九經衍義) and Hongbeom yeonui (洪範衍義), co-authored by Yi Hwi-il (李徽逸, 1619–1672) and Yi Hyeon-il (李玄逸, 1627–1704). Seonghaksipdo (聖學十圖) by Yi Hwang (李滉) and Seonghakjipyo (聖學輯要) by Yi I (李珥) are particularly notable works for royal education. Yi I devoted two years to compiling Seonghakjipyo, with the aim of guiding the king toward moral rectitude.33) He selectively curated and categorized essential teachings on scholarship and governance from Confucian classics and historical records into five chapters (篇), which he presented to King Seonjo in 1575 (the 7th year of King Seonjo’s reign).34)

During the reign of King Yeongjo (r. 1724-1776), intellectual pursuits expanded significantly compared to earlier periods, and their content became more diverse and comprehensive. A notable aspect of scholarly endeavors during this period was the ongoing compilation and organization of materials essential for the education of Joseon's kings and grand heirs, which drew specifically from Joseon’s own historical records. Given the longstanding tradition of prioritizing Chinese Confucian classics and historical texts for royal education, shift represents a significant innovation, emphasizing the unique contributions of Joseon’s indigenous historiography to royal education.35)

Educational texts during King Yeongjo’s reign were compiled in various ways: either through direct authorship by Yeongjo himself, by officials under his command, or through independent scholarly efforts. King Yeongjo compiled several works for the education of Crown Prince Jangheon (莊獻世子, 1735-1762), such as Sanghun (常訓)36), Jaseongpyeon (自省編)37), Simgam (心鑑)38), Jeonghun (政訓)39), Sok Sanghun (續常訓)40), and Sok Jaseongpyeon (續自省編). In addition, Jeong Seok-oh (鄭錫五, 1691-1748) and Jo Hyeon-myeong (趙顯命, 1690-1752) compiled Jogam (祖鑑)41) as an educational text for the crown prince. Yi Se-geun(李世瑾, 1664-1735) compiled Seongjo gaengjangrok (聖朝羹墻錄)42), an educational text for the royal heirs, which he presented to King Yeongjo. This tradition of producing educational texts was further enriched by Jeong Hang-nyeong (鄭恒齡, 1700-?), who expanded Sanghun by incorporating historical facts from Joseon to produce Sanghun jippyeon (常訓輯編).

These works were primarily educational texts that organized the historical precedents (典故) of Joseon kings, a distinctive hallmark of King Yeongjo’s reign. However, this emphasis on Joseon history did not preclude attention to Chinese history. In 1736 (the 12th year of King Yeongjo’s reign), Song Seong-myeong (宋成明, 1674–1740) revised and expanded Yeokdaesaron (歷代史論). This work had originally been compiled into 17 volumes by his father, Song Jang-eun (宋徵殷, 1652–1720), who had spent many years collecting texts. The revised edition expanded to 41 volumes (41卷10冊). This work gathers historical critiques (史評) by Confucian scholars of successive generations on Chinese emperors, officials, and other historical figures, spanning from the Tang and Yu (唐虞) to the Song dynasty (宋).

After the death of Crown Prince Jangheon in 1762, King Yeongjo devoted himself to the upbringing and education of his grandson, Yi Seong (李祘), the future king Jeongjo. In August 1762 (the 38th year of King Yeongjo's reign), the Crown Prince’s grandson was formally appointed as Donggung (東宮, heir to the throne). Two years later, in February 1764, the royal lineage was transferred to Crown Prince Hyojang. In May of the same year, King Yeongjo compiled Johun (祖 訓), a text divided into ten thematic sections, as a guide for the 15-year-old grandson’s moral and political education. On the first page of Johun (祖訓), the eight characters “御製祖訓, 勉我沖子” are inscribed in large script. On the second page, another eight characters, “爲聖爲賢, 惟在乎爾” are written in the same style.43) These inscriptions reflect King Yeongjo’s exhortation to personally compose Johun as guidance for his young grandson, emphasizing that the attainment of sagehood or virtuous excellence rests entirely upon him. In Johun, King Yeongjo expressed that the immense responsibility of sustaining the royal lineage and the state, which rested on both himself, at 71 years old, and his young grandson. He candidly reflected on his regret for failing to guide Crown Prince Jangheon adequately and emphasized that the future prosperity or decline of the state depended on the Royal Grandson. With heartfelt sincerity, Yeongjo repeatedly urged his grandson to recognize his deep devotion and to follow his teachings. This work embodies King Yeongjo’s dedication to the Royal Grandson’s education reflected his fervent hope that the tragedies of the past would not recur. Hong Bong-han, who closely served King Yeongjo, likely understood the king’s sentiments more deeply than anyone else. As the Crown Prince’s maternal grandfather and someone with a particularly close bond with his grandson, Hong likely felt a profound responsibility to support the Royal Grandson and aid in his preparation for leadership.

In 1769, under these circumstances, Hong Bong-han compiled Jeongsa Hwigam for the Royal Grandson. Quoting Cheng Hao (程顥, 1032–1082), who remarked that “The greatest duty of a ruler lies in studying past events,”44) Hong emphasized the need for an effective educational resource tailored to the Royal Grandson’s needs. Hong likely found many existing historical compilations impractical as study materials for the Royal Grandson due to their extensive length. These works included the 150-volume Chipyungyoram (治平要覽) compiled by Jeong In-ji (鄭麟趾, 1396–1478) and others; the 24-volume Myeongsa gangmok (明史綱目) compiled by Yi Hyeon-seok; and the 41-volume Yeokdaesaron (歷代史論), compiled by Song Jing-eun and Song Seong-myeong. At the time, the Royal Grandson was assisting King Yeongjo in governance, engaging in discussions of numerous texts, and maintaining a demanding schedule. Hong sought to provide a resource that would help the Royal Grandson quickly understand the deeds of rulers in Chinese history and cultivate the virtues essential to kingship. To this end, Hong categorized the content into 34 thematic sections and further divided the material into ‘matters to emulate’ (法條) and ‘matters to avoid’ (戒條). These divisions clearly delineated virtues and vices (善惡), wisdom and folly (賢愚), righteousness and corruption (邪正), and gains and losses (得失). Additionally, through geun-an (謹 按), he included precedents from Joseon’s kings, referenced Confucian classics (經傳), and added his own commentary. This carefully structured effort resulted in the eight sections compiled into four books Jeongsa Hwigam, a text meticulously designed to support the Royal Grandson’s education and development as a ruler.

In the preface to Jeongsa Hwigam, Hong Bong-han quoted Cheng Hao (程顥), who remarked, “When the ruler’s will is firmly established, the governance of the realm is achieved.”45) He emphasized that a ruler must first solidify their resolve to effectively govern the state. Throughout Jeongsa Hwigam, Hong underscored that the foundation of such resolve lies in scholarly learning. Through this educational text, Hong aimed to prepare the Royal Grandson, the future king, with the virtues and qualities of a ruler, encompassing the principles of Heaven’s Mandate (天命), governance through virtue (德治), and people-centered rule (民本). The text was meticulously designed to instill the moral character and intellectual foundation comprehensively. In this regard, Jeongsa Hwigam reflects both the deep affection of a maternal grandfather and the fulfillment of Hong’s duty as the Crown Prince’s mentor, as well as his unwavering loyalty and commitment to the Royal Grandson’s education.